Sentences with phrase «get any physical evidence»

Not exact matches

The Innocence Project is now seeking to get untested physical evidence from Hae's murder case tested to see if there's a match to any other suspect.

Zero physical evidence that we've been here beyond the most recent thousands of years, and you'd have to multiply that time by «at least» 5,000 times of us being here to get to the millions of years needed to substantially evolve... Who among you thinks that mankind has been here mucking it up for thousands of years... times 5,000?

Some people point to 1 Corinthians 13:10 as evidence that when we get to heaven we will be perfect, but this verse is talking about spiritual gifts and is not teaching anything about mental or physical perfection when we get to heaven.

What do you get an all - powerful being with no physical evidence to prove its existence?

With the wheelbarrow and chair example you can easily know you've had faith in them once you get in it or stand on it since there's physical evidence.

Ridge Meadows Doula Services provides emotional support, physical comfort measures and an objective viewpoint, while helping birthing people and their families get the evidence - based information they need to make informed decisions.

Also there is evidence that it is harder to get an A level in the physical sciences than in the arts.

The lack of physical evidence of Christine's life may begin as a source of frustration for Kate on a purely professional level, but as she learns more, interviewing friends and coworkers, getting even a tangential sense of what might have driven Christine to her decision (with many of those moments eventually acted out in wonderfully campy excerpts from this nonexistent film), she learns that the exploitation of media and its desire to show the worst of society, offering the most broken aspects of the world to the altar of ratings (this of course being the aspect of the story that helped birth Network) hasn't changed much from the 70's to the modern day.

This plan, based on scientific evidence, can help improve the health and welfare of cats by helping cat owners to mimic the conditions cats would usually contend with to get their food, thus providing both physical and mental stimulation.

I mean, one of the things that I've tried to do over these last four years and will continue to do over the next four years is to make sure that we are promoting the integrity of our scientific process; that not just in the physical and life sciences, but also in fields like psychology and anthropology and economics and political science — all of which are sciences because scholars develop and test hypotheses and subject them to peer review — but in all the sciences, we've got to make sure that we are supporting the idea that they're not subject to politics, that they're not skewed by an agenda, that, as I said before, we make sure that we go where the evidence leads us.

The physical evidence becomes more dramatic every year: forests retreating, animals moving north, glaciers melting, wildfire seasons getting longer, higher rates of droughts, floods, and storms — five times as many in the 2000s as in the 1970s.

I realize it's kind of late for making suggestions, but here goes anyway: Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf D. Tscheuschner claim to have falsified the existence of an atmospheric greenhouse effect.It looks like you have addressed T&G's main arguments (eg, about the 2nd law), but I wonder if it might be appropriate to put in a brief description of what it means to «falsify» something in the scientific sense — ie, essentially what T&G must show (and failed to show) to make their case that there is no greenhouse effect: namely, 1) experimental evidence that shows the opposite of what an atmospheric greenhouse effect would necessarily produce and / or 2) evidence that the greenhouse effect would actually violate some physical law (eg, 2nd law of thermo) The pot on the stove example is obviously an attempt to show that you get a colder temp with the water than without, but I think it's worthwhile explicitly stating that «because T&G failed to demonstrate that the pot on the stove example is a valid analogy for the earth, they failed to falsify the atmospheric greenhouse effect» And you could also add a sentence stating that «because T&G failed to show that the greenhouse effect would require a violation of the 2nd law [because their arguments were incorrect], they also failed to falsify»

Go study the physical evidence and timing of volvanic triggers of major glaciation events and get back to us with your earth shaking hypothesis: IOW, good times with dreaming with Jim Beam.

If there is no such evidence then it is about time that some physical experiments are conducted to get some real empirical data and evidence.

Failure to do so or simply delaying in getting any injuries checked out may provide the person or company you're suing with evidence that the physical problems you claim to have don't actually exist.

It is important to recover physical evidence immediately after an accident because, if it is not preserved or photographed in the first few days, it may get modified by time, the weather, lost, destroyed or repaired.

If you are already experiencing symptoms of depression then accumulating clutter will only make those symptoms get worse, and there is lots of solid evidence to suggest that keeping clutter around will adversely affect your physical, emotional and spiritual health.